on the safety assessment of alkyl peg sulfosuccinates as ... · sulfosuccinate 5monoesters contain...

Final Report

On the Safety Assessment of Alkyl PEG Sulfosuccinates

As Used in Cosmetics

March 6, 2012

The 2012 Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel members are: Chair, Wilma F. Bergfeld, M.D., F.A.C.P.; Donald V.

Belsito, M.D.; Ronald A Hill, Ph.D.; Curtis D. Klaassen, Ph.D.; Daniel C. Liebler, Ph.D.; James G. Marks, Jr., M.D.; Ronald

C. Shank, Ph.D.; Thomas J. Slaga, Ph.D.; and Paul W. Snyder, D.V.M., Ph.D. The CIR Director is F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D.

This report was prepared by Wilbur Johnson, Jr., M.S., Manager/Lead Specialist and Bart Heldreth, Ph.D., Chemist.

© Cosmetic Ingredient Review

1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 412 Washington, DC 20036-4702 ph 202.331.0651 fax 202.331.0088 cirinfo@cir-

safety.org

1

ABSTRACT: Alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates function mostly as surfactants/cleansing agents in cosmetic products. Dermal

penetration of these ingredients would be unlikely because of their substantial polarity and molecular sizes. Negative oral

carcinogenicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity data on chemically related laureths (PEG lauryl ethers) and

negative repeated dose toxicity and skin sensitization data on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate supported the safety of these

alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates in cosmetic products, but these ingredients do have the potential for causing ocular/skin irritation.

The CIR Expert Panel concluded that the alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates are safe in the present practices of use and concentration

when formulated to be non-irritating.

INTRODUCTION

The safety of the following ingredients in cosmetics is reviewed in this report:

Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Laureth-6 Sulfosuccinate



Disodium Deceth-5 Sulfosuccinate


Magnesium Laureth-3 Sulfosuccinate

Disodium C12-14 Pareth-1 Sulfosuccinate


Disodium C12-15 Pareth Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Coceth-3 Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Laneth-5 Sulfosuccinate

Disodium C12-14 Sec-Pareth-3

Sulfosuccinate


Sulfosuccinate


Sulfosuccinate


Sulfosuccinate


Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Oleth-3 Sulfosuccinate

These ingredients function mostly as surfactants-cleansing agents in cosmetic products.

An amended CIR final safety assessment on alkyl PEG ethers, with a conclusion that these ingredients were safe in

the present practices of use and concentration, was completed in 2011,1 and data on laureths (PEG lauryl ethers) from that

review were used to fill pertinent data gaps (i.e., carcinogenicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity) in the current

safety assessment. These data have relevance because the first level metabolites of alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates would likely

include the corresponding alkyl PEG ethers; e.g., magnesium laureth-3 sulfosuccinate may be metabolized to laureth-3 (PEG-

3 lauryl ether) and sulfosuccinic acid.

An amended final safety assessment on sodium laureth sulfate and related salts of sulfated ethoxylated alcohols was

published in 2010, with the conclusion that these cosmetic ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and

concentration when formulated to be nonirritating.2 Furthermore, a CIR amended final safety assessment on alkyl PEG

ethers with a safe as used conclusion became publicly available this year,1 and a CIR amended final safety assessment on

dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate (diethylhexyl sodium sulfosuccinate, current INCI name) with a similar conclusion was

published in 1998.3 Based on structural similarities, the applicability of data on alkyl PEG ethers (other than laureths),

sodium laureth sulfate, and diethylhexyl sodium sulfosuccinate from the respective safety assessments has been considered in

this safety assessment of alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates in cosmetic products.

CHEMISTRY

Definition and Structure

The definitions, structures, and functions of the anionic surfactants reviewed in this safety assessment are included

in Table 1.4 The ingredients in this review share a sulfo-substituted, succinic acid core. Accordingly, the salts of these

materials are sulfosuccinates. The ingredients in this review are the salts of alkyl polyethylene glycol (PEG), mono-esters of

2

sulfosuccinic acid (even though none of the INCI names includes PEG, these ingredients are collectively referred to as alkyl

PEG sulfosuccinates).5 For example, disodium laureth sulfosuccinate consists of a twelve-carbon alkyl chain (lauryl),

connected to the sulfosuccinate core via a PEG chain, wherein the average number of ethoxy repeat units (n) is between 1 and

4 (i.e., laureth-1 through laureth-4) (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate

Chemical and Physical Properties

Sulfosuccinate monoesters contain a hydrophobic end that consists of a fatty alcohol chain.5 The chain length and

degree of saturation of the fatty acid may vary this hydrophobicity. The level of hydrophobicity imparted by the fatty alcohol

is also affected by the different degrees of ethoxylation of the PEG chain. For instance, monoesters based on linear fatty

alcohols are only partially soluble in water. Those based on fatty alcohol ethoxylates have greater water solubility. Water

solubility is also increased when the structure contains branched chains. Solubility in less-polar solvents, such as isopropanol

and 1,2-propylene glycol, is considered more difficult to achieve. Due to the ester linkage, these sulfosuccinate ingredients

are sensitive to hydrolysis, especially under acidic conditions. Properties of sulfosuccinate ingredients (trade name materials

included) are found in Table 2. Tables 3 and 4 contain specifications/actual composition data for disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate trade name mixtures tested at various concentrations of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in studies summarized

later in the Toxicology section of this report.

Methods of Production

The synthesis of these ingredients occurs according to a 2-step procedure.5 In the first step, maleic anhydride is

reacted with an ethoxylated fatty alcohol. The second step involves sulfonation of the resulting maleic ester. In the

production of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, for example, a monoester is formed by reacting the ethoxylated alcohol (e.g.,

Laureth-2) with maleic anhydride.6 The monoester is then reacted with sodium bisulfite to form the sulfosuccinate.7,8

Impurities

According to one report, disodium laureth sulfosuccinate contained the following impurities/by-products: residual

sodium sulfite (< 0.1%), residual sodium sulfate (1 to 3%), residual laureth-2 (1 to 5%), and 1,4-dioxane by-product (< 10

ppm).6 Another source indicates that a disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (active ingredient [40%];

anionic active matter [33%]) contains: < 1 ppm 1,4-dioxane and < 1 ppm ethylene oxide (if presence of either is technically

unavoidable in good manufacturing practice); < 1 ppm residual monomers; and heavy metals, Pb ( < 10 ppm), Ni (< 10 ppm),

Cd (< 1 ppm), As (< 1 ppm), Sb (< 1 ppm), and Hg (< 0.2 ppm).8 A third source indicates that disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate contains formaldehyde at a maximum level of 0.056% and 1,4-dioxane at a maximum level of 0.001%.9

USE

Cosmetic

The ingredients reviewed in this safety assessment function mostly as surfactants-cleansing agents in cosmetic

products. These and additional functions are included in Table 1.

3

According to information supplied to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by industry as part of the Voluntary

Cosmetic Registration Program (VCRP), the following ingredients were being used in personal care products (mostly rinse-

off products): disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, disodium laureth-6 sulfosuccinate, disodium deceth-6 sulfosuccinate, and

disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate.10 These data are summarized in Table 5. Independent of these data, the results of

a survey of ingredient use concentrations that was conducted by the Personal Care Products Council (Council) in 2011, also

in Table 5, provided use concentrations for disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (0.06 to 10%).11 The highest use concentration of

this ingredient was in shampoos (noncoloring). Subsequent inclusion of magnesium laureth-3 sulfosuccinate in another

Council survey yielded no use concentration data on this ingredient.12 No uses of the remaining ingredients reviewed in this

safety assessment were reported in the VCRP database or in the Council survey.

Cosmetic products containing the ingredients reported as being used may be applied to the skin and hair, or,

incidentally, may come in contact with the eyes and mucous membranes. Products containing these ingredients may be

applied as frequently as several times per day and may come in contact with the skin or hair for variable periods following

application. Daily or occasional use may extend over many years.

Disodium laureth sulfosuccinate is used in hair color sprays at a maximum reported concentration of 2%, and could

be inhaled. In practice, 95% to 99% of the droplets/particles released from cosmetic sprays have aerodynamic equivalent

diameters >10 µm.13,14 Therefore, most droplets/particles incidentally inhaled from cosmetic sprays would be deposited in

the nasopharyngeal and thoracic regions of the respiratory tract and would not be respirable (i.e., able to enter the lungs) to

any appreciable amount.15,16

Noncosmetic

Reportedly, sulfosuccinates are used to improve the wetting and spreading characteristics of water-soluble pesticide

sprays and are found in liquid fertilizer, insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides.5

TOXICOKINETICS

Studies on the toxicokinetics of sulfosuccinate ingredients in this safety assessment, following oral, dermal, or

inhalation exposure, were not found in the published literature.

TOXICOLOGICAL STUDIES

Acute Oral Toxicity


According to a material safety data sheet (MSDS) on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (30 to 39.9% % by weight),

the acute oral LD50 for this chemical is > 10,000 mg/kg (rats), based on data on components or similar materials. Additional

details were not provided.9

In an acute oral toxicity test involving rats, the LD50 for a disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material

(active ingredient [40%]; anionic active matter [33%] ) was > 3,000 mg/kg.8 Additional study details were not provided.

Groups of 5 male and 5 female NMRI mice (~ 6 to 8 weeks old) were used to evaluate the genotoxicity of disodium

laureth sulfosuccinate in a micronucleus test.17 Test animals received a single oral dose of the test substance (dose = 2,000

mg/kg body weight) in distilled water and were monitored for signs of acute toxicity, up to 48 h post-dosing. None of the

animals died and there was no evidence of clinical signs. Genotoxicty test results are summarized later in the report text.

The acute oral toxicity of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (trade name material, 40% active matter) was evaluated

using fasted, young adult male albino rats (number not stated).18 After a single dose of the test substance (dose volume = 10

ml/kg) was administered by gavage, no adverse effects were observed. An LD50 of > 2,000 mg/kg was reported.

4

The acute oral toxicity of a trade name mixture containing 24% active material was evaluated using 10 Sprague-

Dawley rats (5 males, 5 females; ages not stated).19 Data on the composition of this material are included in Table 4. The

total active material (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate plus sodium lauryl sulfoacetate) in this mixture was 24%. Of this 24%,

70% (16.8% of the total mixture) was disodium laureth sulfosuccinate and 30% (7.2% of the total mixture) was sodium lauryl

sulfoacetate. Each rat received a 5,000 mg/kg oral dose (gavage) of the test substance, and the animals were observed for 15

days. Because the concentration of active material in the test material was 16.8%, each rat received an 840 mg/kg dose of

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (0.168 x 5,000 = 840 mg/kg). All of the female rats died within 24 h of dose administration,

but all male rats survived to the end of the study. The following signs were observed in the male rats and in female rats:

decreased activity, diarrhea, labored breathing, and an unsteady gait. Gross necropsy findings in the female rats included:

distended/gas-filled stomach, red stomach mucosa and mucosal erosion of the stomach (with rugae absent), red intestinal

mucosa, and red substance in the intestines. The trade name material containing 16.8% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate was

classified as a toxic substance.


Similarly, information in an MSDS on Disodium C12-14 Pareth-2 Sulfosuccinate (~ 40% disodium mono-

[polyoxyethylene alkyl) sulfosuccinate in trade name material) indicates that the acute oral LD50 of this chemical is 3,490

mg/kg (rats).20 Additional details were not provided.

Acute Dermal Toxicity


According to an MSDS on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (30 to 39.9% by weight), the acute dermal LD50 for this

chemical is > 2,000 mg/kg (rabbits), based on data on components or similar materials. Additional details were not

provided.9

Repeated Dose Oral Toxicity


The repeated dose oral toxicity of a disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (active ingredient [40%];

anionic active matter [33%]) was evaluated using groups of Sprague-Dawley Crl:CD (SD) BR rats.21 The control (deionized

water) and 1,000 mg/kg/day dose groups each contained 10 males and 10 females, and the 62.5 and 250 mg/kg dose groups

each contained 5 males and 5 females. The test material was administered (dose volume = 10 ml/kg) 7 days per week for 4

consecutive weeks. At the end of the dosing period, some of the animals were observed during a 4-week recovery period and

the remaining animals were killed for pathological investigations.

There were no treatment-related deaths or changes, based on ophthalmological examinations and evaluations for

clinical signs, body weight changes, or food consumption. In the highest dose group (1,000 mg/kg/day), treatment-related

increases in alkaline phosphatase (moderate) and in SGPT (slight) were observed in both sexes, and there was a trend toward

increased protein in the urine in males of this group. These changes were not observed at the end of the recovery period.

Mild reversible changes in the liver (increased weight and hypertrophy) were also observed in the highest dose group. The

NOEL was considered to be 250 mg/kg/day.21

In another study, groups of Sprague-Dawley CD, SPF-quality rats (10 males, 10 females/group) received oral doses

of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (trade name material, composition not stated) daily for 28 days.18 Three groups received

doses of 100, 300, and 1,000 mg/kg body weight per day, and the fourth group served as the untreated control group.

Additionally, a recovery group consisting of 5 males and 5 females was used to determine the reversibility of possible test

substance-related findings. None of the animals died and, compared to the control group, there was no deviation in body

weight development in any of the 3 dose groups.

5

The following test substance-related findings, all in the highest dose group, were reported: stimulation of propulsion

(swallowing and peristalsis) and salivation, alterations in hematological parameters and in clinical chemistry (i.e., alterations

in alanine aminotransferase [ALT] values), significantly increased liver weight, and ulceration and edema of the forestomach

mucosa (local irritation effects) at macroscopic examination. Effects on the forestomach mucosa were not observed after a

34-day recovery period. Other findings included small cellular infiltrations (no further details) in 100 and 300 mg/kg dose

groups. The systemic NOAEL was 300 mg/kg body weight in this study. Additionally, a no observed adverse effect

concentration (NOAEC) of < 1% for local compatibility was deduced. It was stated that the labeling of this disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate trade name material for possible toxic effects after chronic exposure is not necessary.18

Ocular Irritation


The ocular irritation potential of diluted disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (25% active matter in a trade name

material) was evaluated according to OECD Guideline No. 405 using 4 rabbits of the Kleinrusse Chbb:HM strain.18 The test

substance (0.1 ml) was instilled once into the eye of each animal, and untreated eyes served as controls. Mean ocular

irritation scores (24 h, 48 h, and 72 h) were as follows: 0.9 (cornea), 2.5 (conjunctival erythema), 1.1 (conjunctival edema),

and 0 (iris). At the end of the observation period, slight conjunctival erythema (sore = 1) and slight corneal opacity (score =

1) persisted in one rabbit. It was concluded that the test material has to be classified and labeled to pose a risk of serious

damage to the eyes.

According to an MSDS on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (30 to 39.9% by weight), this chemical substance is

considered a moderate to strong eye irritant, based on data on components or similar materials.9 Additional details were not

provided.

The ocular irritation potential of a trade name mixture containing 10% active material was evaluated using 6 New

Zealand white, young adult rabbits (ages not stated).22 Data on the composition of this material are included in Table 4. The

total active material (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate plus sodium lauryl sulfoacetate) in this mixture is 24%. Of this 24%,

70% (16.8% of the total mixture) is disodium laureth sulfosuccinate and 30% (7.2% of the total mixture) is sodium lauryl

sulfoacetate. Because the trade mixture evaluated contained 10% active material, the concentration of disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate tested was 1.68% (0.10 x 0.168 = 1.68%). The undiluted test substance (0.1 ml) was instilled into the right

eye of each rabbit. Contralateral eyes served as controls. Ocular irritation reactions were scored according to the method of

Draize at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h post-instillation. A positive ocular response was observed in all rabbits tested, and the trade

name mixture was classified as a primary ocular irritant.


According to an MSDS on disodium C12-14 pareth-1 sulfosuccinate (~ 30% disodium mono-[polyoxyethylene

alkyl) sulfosuccinate in trade name material), a 3% solution in physiological saline of a similar chemical is a minimal ocular

irritant (unrinsed eyes) and a non-irritant (rinsed eyes) in guinea pigs.23 Additional details were not provided.


Similarly, information in an MSDS on disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate (~ 40% disodium mono-

[polyoxyethylene alkyl) sulfosuccinate in trade name material) indicates that a 3% solution of this material in physiological

saline is a minimal ocular irritant (unrinsed eyes) and that a 3% solution in physiological saline of a similar chemical is a

non-irritant (rinsed eyes) in guinea pigs.20 Additional details were not provided.

6

Irritation and Sensitization


Non-Human Studies

A disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (active ingredient [40%]; anionic active matter [33%]) was

evaluated in skin irritation tests involving rabbits.8 At a concentration of 3% active matter (effective concentration = 1.2%

active ingredient; procedure not stated), the test substance was non-irritating. In the Duhring chamber test, the test substance

was non-irritating at a concentration of 2% active matter (effective concentration = 0.40 x 0.02 = 0.8% active ingredient).

Details relating to either test procedure were not provided. 18 The same test material did not induce mucous membrane

irritation in rabbits when tested at a concentration of 3% active matter (effective concentration = 0.40 x 0.03 = 1.2% active

ingredient).8 Details relating to the test procedure were not provided.

The skin sensitization potential of the same disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (active ingredient

[40%]; anionic active matter [33%]) was evaluated in the maximization test using 2 groups of 20 guinea pigs of the Pirbright

White strain.8 One of the groups served as the control group. Test concentrations administered during induction included

10% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (4% active matter; effective concentration = 1.6% active ingredient) in physiological

saline (intradermal induction) and 5% (2% active matter; effective concentration = 0.8% active ingredient) in physiological

saline (dermal induction). The challenge concentration was 2% active matter (effective concentration = 0.8% active

ingredient), and reactions were scored at 24 h and 48 h post-exposure. None of the animals had signs of primary skin

irritation or sensitization, and the test substance was considered non-sensitizing.

The skin irritation potential of a disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (25% active matter) was

evaluated using 5 albino rabbits according to OECD guideline No. 404.18 The test substance was applied to one flank (shave

dorsal skin) of each animal. An untreated area served as the control. The contact time under occlusive conditions was 4 h.

Skin reactions were described as weak, with scores of 0.2 for erythema and 0 for edema at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h.

A skin sensitization study on the same disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (25% active matter),

performed according to the Magnusson-Kligman method, involved guinea pigs of the Pirbright Hoe: DHPK strain.18 The

number of animals tested was not stated. Based on the results of a preliminary study on a 10% dilution of the test substance

in deionized water, a 5% dilution of the test substance (effective concentration = 1.6% active matter) was applied during

induction (intracutaneous and epicutaneous; 48 h occlusive conditions) and during the challenge (epicutaneous) phase.

Following both induction procedures, the animals were challenged with the test substance under occlusive conditions for 24

h. Challenge application did not result in any signs of adverse dermal reactions.

Ten guinea pigs per sex were initially injected with 10% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in water (0.05 ml),

followed by injection with 10% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in Freund’s Complete Adjuvant (FCA, 0.05 ml), and, then,

FCA (0.05 ml).24 After a 7-day non-treatment period, the animals were challenged dermally with 5% disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate in water and then re-challenged with 5% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in water. Control animals were

treated with water only. Skin sensitization was not observed in any of the animals tested with disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate or water.

According to an MSDS on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (30 to 39.9% by weight), this chemical substance is

considered a severe skin irritant, based on data on components or similar materials. Additional details were not provided.9


According to an MSDS on a disodium C12-14 pareth-1 sulfosuccinate trade name material (~ 30% disodium mono-

[polyoxyethylene alkyl] sulfosuccinate), a 10% aqueous solution of a similar chemical is neither a primary nor cumulative

skin irritant in guinea pigs.23 Additional details were not provided.


7

Information in an MSDS on a disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate trade name material (~ 40% disodium

mono-[polyoxyethylene alkyl] sulfosuccinate) indicates that a 10% aqueous solution of this chemical is neither a primary nor

cumulative skin irritant in guinea pigs.20 Additional details were not provided.

Human Studies

The skin irritation potential of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate was evaluated using 12 healthy subjects (between

ages of 22 and 64 years).25 The test substance was diluted in a citrate buffer (final pH = 6 ± 0.5). Finn chambers (12 mm)

containing 10% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (50 µl) were applied to the left volar forearm and removed after 48 h.

Citrate buffer (10 mM) served as the control. Sites were examined 1 h after patch removal on day 1 and after 24 h on day 2.

Transepidermal water loss, cutaneous blood flow, and skin capacitance were also measured. Erythema (mild irritation) was

observed on day 1. Application of the citrate buffer control also resulted in erythema. Compared to the control,

transepidermal water loss was significantly elevated on day 2 after test substance application. The test substance did not

induce a significant increase in cutaneous blood flow, but caused a decrease in skin capacitance.

Patch tests were performed to evaluate the role of pre-existing dermatitis in the response to irritants.26 The study

involved 40 healthy subjects and 480 patients with the following types of skin disease: active atopic dermatitis (n =40),

psoriasis (n = 57), eczema (n = 124), urticaria (n = 79), and pruritus (n = 40). The 6 groups (males and females; mean age

range: 18 to 55) were patch tested with 5% and 10% aqueous solutions of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (volume = 17 µl).

Patch tests were applied on both sides of the upper back for 48 h using Al-test on Fixomul. Reactions were scored 1 h after

removal of the strips. For urticaria patients, 2 additional strips were applied to both sides of the back and then removed 30

minutes later. There were no positive reactions to either test concentration of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in healthy

subjects or patients with pre-existing dermatitis.

The skin irritation potential of a trade name mixture containing 24% active material was evaluated in a 14-day

cumulative irritation test using 28 subjects (ages not stated).27 Disodium laureth sulfosuccinate comprised 70% of the active

material; thus, the effective concentration of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in the trade name mixture was 16.8%. Sodium

lauryl sulfoacetate was also included in the mixture. The effective concentration was diluted (1% dilution) to a test

concentration of 0.168% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in the trade mixture. The test concentration (100 µl) was applied

repeatedly to estimate the mean number of days of continuous exposure that would produce a clinical irritation grade of 2.

The positive control (1% SLS) was similarly applied. The mean number of days of continuous exposure to the 0.168%

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade mixture that produced a clinical irritation grade of 2 was 9.86 days (3.93 days for

positive control). A cumulative irritation score of 163 (based on N = 10) was reported for this trade mixture (score of 346 for

positive control), classifying it as possibly a mild irritant during normal use. The positive control was classified as an

experimental irritant.

The skin irritation and sensitization potential of a trade name mixture containing 10% active material was evaluated

in a repeated insult patch test using 51 subjects (males and females; 19 to 65 years old).28 Data on the composition of this

material are included in Table 3. The total active material (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate plus sodium lauryl sulfoacetate) in

this mixture) is 24%. Of this 24%, 70% (16.8% of the total mixture) is disodium laureth sulfosuccinate and 30% (7.2% of the

total mixture) is sodium lauryl sulfoacetate. Because the trade mixture evaluated contained 10% active material, the

concentration of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate tested was 1.68% (0.1 x 16.8% = 1.68%). During induction, an occlusive

patch containing the test material (0.2 ml) was applied (24 h) repeatedly to the back of each subject for a total of 9

applications. After a 10- to 21-day non-treatment period, a challenge patch was applied to a new test site and reactions were

scored at 24 h and 48 h post-application. Barely perceptible erythema (1 subject) and barely perceptible to moderate

cumulative irritant reactions (3 subjects) were observed during induction. Reactions were not observed during the challenge

phase. It was concluded that the trade name mixture containing 1.68% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate did not induce

clinically significant irritation or any evidence of allergic contact dermatitis.

8

Disodium Pareths Sulfosuccinates

The following skin irritation study is included because the CAS Number 68115-56-5 for the chemical tested

[poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), alpha-(3-carboxy-1-oxosulfopropyl)-omega- hydroxy-, C10-C16 alkyl ethers, disodium salts] is

generic for any disodium C10-16 alkyl laureth sulfosuccinate. It contains disodium sulfosuccinate and other components

(e.g., sodium lauryl sulfoacetate) that differ from disodium laureth sulfosuccinate only by modest variations in chain length.

The test article is also identified as 15% Alconate L-3. In this study, 6 New Zealand white rabbits each received a single

dermal application of 15% Alconate-L3 (0.5 ml) at two 2 cm2 sites, abraded and intact, on opposite sides. Each site was

covered with an occlusive patch (2 cm2) for 24 h, and reactions were scored at 24 and 72 h. The test substance was not

classified as a dermal irritant under the conditions of this test (primary irritation index = 3.15).29

Comedogenicity

The comedogenicity of a trade name mixture containing 24% active material was evaluated using 3 young adult

New Zealand white rabbits (1 male, 2 females; ages not stated).30 Data on the composition of this material are included in

Table 3. The total active material (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate plus sodium lauryl sulfoacetate) in this mixture) is 24%.

Of this 24%, 70% (16.8% of the total mixture) is disodium laureth sulfosuccinate and 30% (7.2% of the total mixture) is

sodium lauryl sulfoacetate. The test substance (undiluted; volume not stated) was applied to the left ear of each rabbit for 3

consecutive weeks (5 consecutive days/week). Untreated right ears served as controls. At the end of the dosing period,

control and treated ears were excised and subjected to microscopic examination for comedone formation. Neither follicular

hyperkeratosis nor comedone formation was observed during week 1. However, hyperkeratosis and dry, flaky skin were

observed on all treated ears from week 2 to the end of the study. Reactions were not observed on untreated ears throughout

the study. Acanthotic thickening (hyperplasia) of the epithelium, mild hyperkeratosis, and mild acute inflammatory infiltrates

in the dermal layers were observed at microscopic examination of treated ears. However, there was no evidence of comedone

formation. Based on microscopic findings, the trade name mixture containing 16.8% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate

received a comedogenic score of 1, defined as an increase in visible hyperkeratosis without comedone formation.

REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY

The following reproductive toxicity study summaries are included in the amended CIR final safety assessment on alkyl

PEG ethers.1

Laureths

The reproductive and teratogenic toxicity of compounds analogous to laureth-9 was evaluated.31 Groups of 25 gravid

female rabbits were dosed orally with 0, 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg bw C12AE6 (alcohol ethoxylate[AE] with 12 carbon

atoms in alkyl chain; average number of ethylene oxide units = 6 ) on days 2-16 of gestation, and the animals were

killed and necropsied on day 28 of gestation. In the 100 and 200 mg/kg groups, ataxia and a slight decrease in body

weights was evidence of maternal toxicity. No effects on reproductive parameters were noted. Nine control animals

and 1 test animal died during the study. Based on maternal toxicity, the NOAEL was >50 mg/kg bw/day.

Groups of 25 male and 25 female CD rats were used to evaluate the reproductive toxicity of C14-15AE7 in a two-

generation study. The animals were fed a diet containing 0, 0.05, 0.1, and 0.5% of the test article (equivalent to

approximately 0, 25, 50, and 250 mg/kg bw/day). In three test groups, males and females were given treated feed

throughout the study; in another three groups, females only were dosed, and dosing was performed on days 6-15 of

gestation. Additional details regarding study and dosing regimen were not provided. No compound-related differences

in fertility, gestation, or viability indices were observed, and the NOAEL for reproduction with dietary administration of

C14-15AE7 was >0.5% (equivalent to 250 mg/kg bw/day).

In addition, effects on the FC generation, i.e. offspring from the third mating of the F0 and F1 parental generation, were

examined. Gravid female rats were necropsied and examined on either day 13 or day 21 of gestation. Differences in

maternal and fetal indices were observed in the test groups compared to the controls, but these effects were not

considered test-compound related. Parental female rats and pups of the high-dose group had reduced body weight

gains. In the 0.5% continuous feeding test group, increased mean liver weights of males and females of the P1

9

generation and an increase in relative liver to body weights of males of the 0.5% continuous feeding group of the P2

generation at 60 days were considered compound-related. The NOAEL for maternal and developmental toxicity was 50

mg/kg bw/day.

The reproductive toxicity of C12AE6 was evaluated in a similar study, and the groups of 50 rats were fed 0, 25, 50, or

250 mg/kg bw/day of the test article in the diet. No treatment-related effects on behavior, appearance, survival, or

fertility were observed in any of the test groups. Parental and offspring weight gain was reduced in the 250 m/kg

group. In the 250 mg/kg group, statistically significant increases in embryo lethality and soft tissue anomalies were

observed, and in the 50 mg/kg group, a statistically significant decrease in mean fetal liver weights was observed. None

of these effects were considered test article-related. The NOAEL for reproduction was >250 mg/kg bw/day, and the

NOAELs for maternal and developmental toxicity were 50 mg/kg bw/day C12AE6 in the diet.31

GENOTOXICITY


A disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (active ingredient [40%]; anionic active matter [33%]) was

not mutagenic in the Ames test.8 Details relating to the test procedure were not included. The mutagenicity of another

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (32% active matter) was evaluated using the following Salmonella

typhimurium strains with and without metabolic activation:18 TA 100, TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 1538, and TA 98. The test

substance was evaluated at concentrations ranging from 0.32 µl to 200 µl/plate. A bacteriotoxic effect was observed at a

dose of 200 µl/plate. The test material was not mutagenic, with or without metabolic activation, over the range of

concentrations tested.

The genotoxicity of a trade name material identified as disodium laureth sulfosuccinate was evaluated in the

micronucleus test using groups of 5 male and 5 female NMRI mice (~ 6 to 8 weeks old).17 Test animals received a single

oral dose of the test substance (dose = 2,000 mg/kg body weight) in distilled water. Results relating to acute oral toxicity are

included in that section of the safety assessment. Cyclophosphamide (CPA) and distilled water served as positive and

negative controls, respectively. Two thousand polychromatic erythrocytes (PCE’s) per mouse were analyzed for the presence

of micronuclei in bone marrow smears. For an investigation of bone marrow toxicity, the proportion of PCE’s among total

erythrocytes was evaluated on the basis of ~ 200 erythrocytes. The frequency of micronucleated PCE’s in the vehicle control

group was within the physiological range, whereas, the positive control was genotoxic. Disodium laureth sulfosuccinate did

not induce an increase in the number of micronucleated PCE’s in any of the test groups. There was also no statistically

significant difference in the proportion of PCE’s among total erythrocytes when compared to the vehicle control. Disodium

laureth sulfosuccinate was not genotoxic.

CARCINOGENICITY

The following carcinogenicity study summaries are included in the amended CIR final safety assessment on alkyl PEG

ethers.1

Laureths

The carcinogenic potential of compounds analogous to laureth-9 was evaluated.31 Groups of 65 rats/gender were fed a

diet containing 0, 0.1, 0.5, and 1% C14-15AE7 for 2 yrs. At 1 yr, 14-15 animals per gender were killed and necropsied.

No compound-related changes were seen in behavior or appearance at any time. Survival rate was comparable

between test and control animals. Body weight gains were significantly decreased in females of the 0.5 and 1.0%

groups and males of the 1% group. At necropsy, no differences in relative or absolute organ weights were observed

between test and control animals. There was no evidence of a carcinogenic effect.

C12-13AE6.5 was fed to 100 Sprague-Dawley rats at concentrations up to 1% in feed for 2 yrs. Feed consumption, and

correspondingly, body weight gain, was decreased for females fed 0.5 or 1% and for males fed diets containing 1% of

the test compound. No microscopic effects were seen, and C12-13AE6.5 was not carcinogenic.31

10

SUMMARY

The safety of the following ingredients in cosmetics is reviewed in this safety assessment: disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate, disodium laureth-6 sulfosuccinate, disodium laureth-9 sulfosuccinate, disodium laureth-12 sulfosuccinate,

disodium deceth-5 sulfosuccinate, disodium deceth-6 sulfosuccinate, magnesium laureth-3 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14

pareth-1 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-15 pareth sulfosuccinate, disodium coceth-

3 sulfosuccinate, disodium laneth-5 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14 sec-pareth-3 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14 sec-

pareth-5 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14 sec-pareth-7 sulfosuccinate, disodium C12-14 sec-pareth-9 sulfosuccinate,

disodium C12-14 sec-pareth-12 sulfosuccinate, and disodium oleth-3 sulfosuccinate.

Together, data reported to the Food and Drug Administration’s Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program in 2011

and the results of a 2011 Personal Care Products Council (Council) survey indicated use of the following ingredients in

cosmetics, mostly in rinse-off products: disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (0.06% [eyeliner] to 10% [noncoloring shampoos]),

disodium laureth-6 sulfosuccinate, disodium deceth-6 sulfosuccinate, and disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate.

Subsequent inclusion of magnesium laureth-3 sufosuccinate in a 2011 Council Survey yielded no use concentration data on

this ingredient. Therefore, of the 18 ingredients included in the survey, only use concentration data on disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate were reported.

A method for the production of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate involves ethoxylation of a fatty alcohol,

esterification with maleic acid anhydride, addition of sodium sulfite, and neutralization with sodium hydroxide. Impurities

present in disodium laureth sulfosuccinate include 1,4-dioxane, ethylene oxide, and formaldehyde. According to an MSDS

on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, this chemical contains formaldehyde at a maximum level of 0.056% and 1,4-dioxane at a

maximum level of 0.001%.

Studies on the toxicokinetics of sulfosuccinates, following oral, dermal, or inhalation exposure, reviewed in this

safety assessment were not found in the published literature. However, certain predictions may be made based on their

chemical and physical properties. Due to the ester linkage, these sulfosuccinate ingredients are sensitive to hydrolysis,

especially under acidic conditions. Accordingly, if these ingredients have the ability to penetrate the skin, then first level

metabolites would likely include the corresponding alkyl PEG ethers (e.g., magnesium laureth-3 sulfosuccinate may be

metabolized to Laureth-3 and sulfosuccinic acid).

In 2 acute oral toxicity studies on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name materials involving rats, LD50’s of

>10,000 mg/kg and > 2,000 mg/kg were reported. However, all of the female rats that received a single 840 mg/kg oral dose

of a trade name material containing 16.8% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate died within 24 h of dosing, whereas, all male rats

survived to the end of the study. An acute oral LD50 of 3,490 mg/kg (rats) was reported for disodium C12-14 pareth-2

sulfosuccinate. Reportedly, the acute dermal LD50 for one disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material is > 2,000

mg/kg (rabbits), based on data on components or similar materials. In two 28-day oral toxicity studies (rats) on disodium

laureth sulfosuccinate trade name materials, an NOEL of 250 mg/kg/day and a systemic NOAEL of 300 mg/kg/day were

reported. Increased liver weight was observed in both studies.

A disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (25% active matter) was classified as posing a risk of serious

ocular damage in rabbits. Furthermore, a trade name mixture containing 1.68% active disodium laureth sulfosuccinate was

classified as a primary ocular irritant in rabbits. Disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate (~ 40% disodium mono-

[polyoxyethylene alkyl) sulfosuccinate in trade name material) was minimally irritating to the eyes of guinea pigs when

tested as a 3% solution in physiological saline.

Disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (10% in citrate buffer) was classified as a mild skin irritant in healthy subjects. In

dermatitis patients and healthy subjects in another study, disodium laureth sulfosuccinate (5% and 10% aqueous solutions)

did not induce skin irritation. The results of a human cumulative skin irritation study on a trade name mixture containing

0.168% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate predicted that this material would be a mild skin irritant during normal use. A trade

name mixture containing 1.68% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate did not induce clinically significant irritation or any

evidence of allergic contact dermatitis in normal human subjects. A disodium C10-16 alkyl laureth sulfosuccinate, similar to

11

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, and a disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name material (effective test concentrations =

0.8% and 1.2% active ingredient) did not induce skin irritation in rabbits. Skin sensitization was not observed at an effective

challenge concentration of 0.8% active ingredient in a separate study (guinea pigs) involving the same tradename material.

At a higher concentration (25% active matter), a different disodium laureth sulfosuccinate tradename material also did not

induce skin irritation, and sensitization was not observed in guinea pigs when the material was diluted to an effective

concentration of 1.6% active matter. A 10% aqueous solution of a disodium C12-14 pareth-2 sulfosuccinate tradename

material (~ 40% disodium mono-[polyoxyethylene alkyl] sulfosuccinate) induced neither primary nor cumulative irritation in

guinea pigs.

A trade name mixture containing 16.8% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate induced an increase in visible

hyperkeratosis, without comedone formation, in rabbits.

In two-generation oral reproductive studies with dietary administration of compounds analogous to laureth-9, the

NOAEL for reproductive toxicity was >250 mg/kg bw/day, and the NOAELs for maternal and developmental toxicity was 50

mg/kg bw/day.

Ames test and micronucleus test results for disodium laureth sulfosuccinate trade name materials were negative.

Compounds that are analogous to laureth-9 were not carcinogenic in feeding studies in which rats were given up to 1% in the

diet for 2 years.

DISCUSSION

The CIR Expert Panel noted that negative mammalian genotoxicity data on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate were

received in response to a previous request for data, but dermal absorption and inhalation toxicity data were not received. In

the absence of inhalation and dermal absorption data, the Panel reasoned that skin penetration of these alkyl PEG

sulfosuccinates would be unlikely because of their substantial polarity and molecular sizes. In addition, the high acute LD50s

reported in oral animal studies suggested that the absorption of these substances through the skin at relevant doses has little

potential to cause systemic effects.

The Panel did acknowledge that statistically significant increases in liver weights in animals that received repeated

oral doses of disodium laureth sulfosuccinate were reported, but given the absence of any other findings indicative of liver

toxicity, such findings were not considered to be relevant. The Panel noted that sulfosuccinates have the potential for causing

ocular/skin irritation, but not sensitization. Therefore, products containing these ingredients should be formulated to be non-

irritating.

Because disodium laureth sulfosuccinate can be used at maximum reported concentration of 2% in cosmetics that

may be sprayed (hair color sprays), the Panel discussed the issue of incidental inhalation exposure. In the absence of

sufficient inhalation data, the Panel considered data characterizing the potential for alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates to cause

systemic toxicity, genotoxicity, ocular or dermal irritation, or sensitization, and the potential for laureths to cause

reproductive and developmental toxicity or carcinogenicity. The Panel noted that 95 – 99% of the droplets/particles

produced in cosmetic aerosols would be deposited in the nasopharyngeal and thoracic regions of the respiratory tract and

would not be respirable to any appreciable amount. Coupled with the small actual exposure in the breathing zone and the

concentrations at which the ingredients are used, this information suggested that incidental inhalation would not be a

significant route of exposure that might lead to local respiratory or systemic toxic effects.

The Panel also addressed the potential for ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane impurities in alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates.

Due to the volatility of ethylene oxide, it would be unexpected to find any appreciable quantity of the chemical residing as an

impurity in these ingredients. The available data bear out that current methods of manufacture do not result in significant

levels of ethylene oxide. The available data have demonstrated contaminant levels of 1,4-dioxane to be less than 10 ppm in

these ingredients, again supporting that current methods of manufacture do not result in significant levels of 1,4-dioxane.

Because of the toxicity of ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane, the Panel stressed that the cosmetics industry should continue to

12

use the necessary procedures to remove these impurities from the alkyl PEG sulfosuccinates before blending them into

cosmetic formulations.

According to an MSDS on disodium laureth sulfosuccinate, this chemical may contain formaldehyde at a maximum

level of 0.056%. The Panel noted that this level is less than the 0.076% formaldehyde limit established by the Panel in its

final safety assessment on this ingredient, and is well below the threshold for any toxicological concerns relating to this

chemical. Furthermore, the effective formaldehyde concentration yielded by disodium laureth sulfosuccinate in formulation

would be even lower, considering that this ingredient is being used at concentrations up to 10% in rinse-off products and at

concentrations up to 2% in leave-on products. At the maximum use concentration of 10%, the formaldehyde concentration

would be no more than 0.006%.

CONCLUSION

The CIR Expert Panel concluded that the following cosmetic ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and

concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be non-irritating:



Disodium Laureth-9 Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium Laureth-12 Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium Deceth-5 Sulfosuccinate*


Magnesium Laureth-3 Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium C12-14 Pareth-1 Sulfosuccinate*


Disodium C12-15 Pareth Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium Coceth-3 Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium Laneth-5 Sulfosuccinate*


Sulfosuccinate*


Sulfosuccinate*


Sulfosuccinate*


Sulfosuccinate*


Sulfosuccinate*

Disodium Oleth-3 Sulfosuccinate*

Were ingredients in this group not in current use to be in the future (indicated by *), the expectation is that they would be

used in product categories and at concentrations comparable to others in the group.

13

Table 1. Definitions, Functions, and Structures of the Sulfosuccinate Ingredients4 Ingredient

CAS No.

Definition Function(s) Formula/structure

Disodium

Deceth-5

Sulfosuccinate

68311-03-5

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

deceth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Deceth-5

Sulfosuccinate is a

disodium salt of the half

ester of an ethoxylated

decyl alcohol and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant –

Hydrotrope

Disodium

Deceth-6

Sulfosuccinate

68311-03-5

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

deceth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Deceth-6

Sulfosuccinate is a



decyl alcohol and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

Disodium

Laureth

Sulfosuccinate

39354-45-5

58450-52-5

(CAS Nos. are

generic for any

disodium

laureth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Laureth

Sulfosuccinate is the

disodium salt of an

ethoxylated lauryl alcohol

half ester of sulfosuccinic

acid.

40754-59-4

42015-08-0 (CAS Nos. are

specific to triethoxylated

(i.e. laureth-3))

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant –

Hydrotrope

68815-56-5 (CAS

No. is generic for

any disodium

C10-16 alkyl

laureth

sulfosuccinate)

wherein n averages between 1 and 4 (i.e. Laureth-1 through

Laureth-4)

Magnesium

Laureth-3

Sulfosuccinate

Magnesium Laureth-3


magnesium salt of the half


lauryl alcohol and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent

Disodium

Laureth-6

Sulfosuccinate

39354-45-5

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

laureth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Laureth-6


disodium salt of an



acid.

40754-59-4[sic; specific to

disodium laureth-3

sulfosuccinate]

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

Disodium

Laureth-9

Sulfosuccinate

39354-45-5

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

laureth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Laureth-9


disodium salt of an



acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

Disodium

Laureth-12

Sulfosuccinate

39354-45-5

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

laureth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Laureth-12


disodium salt of an



acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

14


CAS No.


Disodium

C12-14

Pareth-1

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium C12-14 Pareth-1


disodium salt of an

ethoxylated, partially

esterified sulfosuccinic

acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent

wherein n averages between 11 and 13 (i.e. Laureth-1 through

Myreth-1)

Disodium

C12-14

Pareth-2

Sulfosuccinate



disodium salt of an



acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

wherein n averages between 11 and 13 (i.e. Laureth-2 through Myreth-2)

Disodium

C12-15 Pareth

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium C12-15 Pareth


disodium salt of an



acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

wherein n averages between 11 and 14, and m averages between 1 and 4 (i.e. Laureth-2 through Pentadeceth-4)

Disodium

Coceth-3

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Coceth-3



ester of Coceth-3 and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant -

Emulsifying

Agent

wherein n represents the alkyl groups derived from coconut alcohol

Disodium

Laneth-5

Sulfosuccinate

68890-92-6

(CAS No. is

generic for any

disodium

laneth

sulfosuccinate)

Disodium Laneth-5

Sulfosuccinate is a


ester of Laneth-5 and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

wherein n represents the alkyl groups derived from lanolin alcohol.

Branched Disodium

C12-14

Sec-Pareth-3

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium C12-14 Sec-

Pareth-3 Sulfosuccinate is

a disodium salt of the half

ester of a mixture of

ethoxylated, secondary

C12-14 alcohols and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

wherein n averages between 9 and 11 (i.e. sec-Laureth-3 through sec-Myreth-3)

Disodium

C12-14

Sec-Pareth-5

Sulfosuccinate






C12-14 alcohols and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope


15


CAS No.


Disodium

C12-14

Sec-Pareth-7

Sulfosuccinate






C12-14 alcohols and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope


Disodium

C12-14

Sec-Pareth-9

Sulfosuccinate






C12-14 alcohols and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope


Disodium

C12-14

Sec-Pareth-12

Sulfosuccinate






C12-14 alcohols and

sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing Agent;

Surfactant - Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope


Unsaturated Disodium

Oleth-3

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Oleth-3


disodium salt of an Oleth-3

(Ω-9 unsaturated) half

ester of sulfosuccinic acid.

Surfactant -

Cleansing

Agent;

Surfactant -

Foam

Booster;

Surfactant -

Hydrotrope

16

Table 2. Properties of Sulfosuccinate Ingredients

Properties


(and as trade name materials)


Sulfosuccinate (Beaulight

ESS-10P)

Disodium C12-14 Pareth-

2 Sulfosuccinate

(Beaulight ESS)

Form ~32% active solution in water (clear

liquid).6 water white liquid, as

CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT [CAS No. 68815-56-

5]).9 Clear, colorless to slightly

yellowish liquid surfactant raw

material (as TEXAPON® SB 3 KC

[CAS No. 68815-56-5], average of 3

moles of ethylene oxide).7 Colorless

liquid (as SETACIN 103 SPEZIAL

[CAS No. 39354-45-5]).32

Cololorless or pale yellow liquid

at 20⁰C.23

Colorless or pale yellow

liquid at 20⁰C.20

% Composition CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT: 30 to 39.9% by

weight disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate.9 TEXAPON® SB 3

KC: dry residue (38 to 42%); anionic

surfactant, m.w. 550 (31.5 to 34.5%);

sulfate content (max. 1%); 0.5% citric

acid and 0.4% potassium sorbate as

preservatives.7 SETACIN 103

SPEZIAL: active ingredient (40%),

anionic active matter (33%), and water

content (60%).32

~ 30% disodium mono-

(polyoxyethylene alkyl)

sulfosuccinate (CAS No. 68911-

93-3); ~ 70% water.23

~ 40% disodium mono-

(polyoxyethylene alkyl)

sulfosuccinate (CAS No.

68911-93-3); ~ 60%

water.20

Odor Alcohol (as CHEMCCINATE™

DSLS SURFACTANT).9

Slightly specific.23 Slightly specific.20

Molecular weight ~ 548;6 550 (as SETACIN 103

SPEZIAL).32

Specific Gravity 1.11;6 also 1.11 (at 20⁰C) as

CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT and as SETACIN 103

SPEZIAL.9,32,33

1.10 (at 25⁰C).23 1.15 (at 30⁰C).20

pH 6.6 to 7 (at 10% in water) as

CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT;9 4.5 to 5.5

(TEXAPON® SB 3 KC 10%

solution);7 6.3 (SETACIN 103

SPEZIAL 10% solution).32

~ 6.8 (10% aqueous solution).23 ~ 7 (2% aqueous

solution).20

Solubility Water soluble, as CHEMCCINATE™

DSLS SURFACTANT and as

SETACIN 103 SPEZIAL.9,32

Water soluble.23 Water soluble.20

Freezing point Not determined (as

CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT).9

~ 0⁰C.23 below 0⁰C.20

Boiling point 100⁰C (as CHEMCCINATE™ DSLS

SURFACTANT).9

~ 100⁰C.23 ~ 100⁰C.20

17

Table 3. Specifications for a Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate (16.8%

active)/Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate (7.2% active) Trade Name Mixture34

Composition Limits

% Active (molecular weight 491) 23-27

% Solids 30-35

pH (10% aqueous) 5.5-6.5

% Sodium Sulfate 3% max

% Sodium Chloride 2% max

Residual peroxide Nil

Viscosity (CPS) @ 25°C 10,000 max

Formaldehyde Positive

Table 4. Composition Data on a Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate (16.8%

active)/Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate (7.2% active) Trade Name Mixture35

Composition Value

% Active (molecular weight 491) 24

% Solids 32

pH (10% aqueous) 6.3

% Sulfate 2.2

% Sulfite Nil

% Chloride 1.4

Bleach (% H2O2) Nil

Viscosity (CPS) @ 25°C 236

Sodium Citrate 0.14

Formalin Positive

18

Table 5. Current Frequency and Concentration of Use According to Duration and Type of Exposure10,11,12


Disodium Laureth-6

Sulfosuccinate

Disodium Deceth-6

Sulfosuccinate

# of Uses Conc. (%) # of Uses # of Uses

Exposure Type Eye Area 2 0.06 NR 6

Incidental Ingestion NR NR NR NR

Incidental Inhalation-sprays 2 2 NR NR

Incidental Inhalation-powders NR NR NR NR

Dermal Contact 480 0.06 to 9 NR NR

Deodorant (underarm) NR NR NR NR

Hair - Non-Coloring 125 2 to 10 3 NR

Hair-Coloring 1 2 NR NR

Nail NR NR NR NR

Mucous Membrane 417 0.8 to 8 NR NR

Baby Products 5 NR 3 NR

Duration of Use Leave-On 15 0.06 to 2 NR NR 6 NR

Rinse-Off 592 0.4 to 10 3 NR NR NR

Diluted for (bath) use 59 1 to 4 NR NR NR NR

Totals/Conc. Range 607 0.06 to 10 3 NR 6 NR


Sulfosuccinate

# of Uses

Exposure Type

Eye Area NR

Incidental Ingestion NR

Incidental Inhalation-sprays NR

Incidental Inhalation-powders NR

Inhalation NR

Dermal Contact NR

Deodorant (underarm) NR

Hair - Non-Coloring 4

Hair-Coloring NR

Nail NR

Mucous Membrane NR

Baby Products NR

Duration of Use Leave-On NR

Rinse-Off 4

Diluted for (bath) use NR

Totals/Conc. Range 4

NR = Not Reported; Totals = Rinse-off + Leave-on Product Uses.

Notes: Because each ingredient may be used in cosmetics with multiple exposure types, the sum of all exposure type uses may not equal

the sum total uses. Omission of Conc.(%) column indicates the absence of ingredient use concentration data;

19

References

1. Fiume, M. M. Heldreth B. Bergfeld W. F. Belsito D. V. Hill R. A. Klaasen C. D. Liebler D. Marks J. G. Jr. Shank R.

C. Slaga T. J. Snyder P. W. and Andersen F. A. 2011. Final amended report by the Cosmetic Ingredient

Review Expert Panel. Alkyl PEG ethers as used in cosmetics.

2. Robinson, V. C. Bergfeld W. F. Belsito D. V. Hill R. A. Klaassen C. D. Marks J. G. Jr. Shank R. C. Slaga T. J.

Snyder P. W. and Andersen F. A. Final report on the amended safety assessment of sodium laureth sulfate

and related salts of sulfated ethoxylated alcohols. International Journal of Toxicology. 2010;29:151S-

161S.

3. Willis, L. Nair B. Bergfeld W. F. Belsito D. V. Carlton W. W. Klaassen C. D. Schroeter A. L. Shank R. C. Slaga T.

J. and Andersen F. A. Amended final report on the safety assessment of dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate.

International Journal of Toxicology. 2011;17:1-20.

4. Gottschalck TE and Breslawec HP. International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook. 14 ed. Washington,

DC: Personal Care Products Council, 2012.

5. Deepika and Tyagi, V. K. Sulfosuccinates as mild surfactants. Journal of Oleo Science. 2006;55:429-439.

6. Personal Care Products Council. 1-4-2011. Information Regarding Disodium Sulfosuccinate Ingredients. 2 pages.

7. Cognis GmbH. 2010. Data profile TEXAPN SB 3 KC (Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate).

8. Zschimmer & Schwarz GmbH & Co KG. 2008. Raw material information on Setacin 103 Spezial (Disodium

Laureth Sulfosuccinate). 3 pages.

9. Lubrizol. Material data safety sheet. Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate [pamphlet]. Wickliffe, Ohio: Lubrizol; 2011.

10. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Information supplied to FDA by industry as part of the VCRP FDA database.

2011. Washington, D.C.: FDA.

11. Personal Care Products Council. 1-7-2011. Concentration of Use by FDA Product Category: Sulfosuccinate

Ingredients. 2 pages.

12. Personal Care Products Council. 10-25-2011. Concentration of use by FDA Product category. Magnesium laureth-3

sulfosuccinate.

13. Johnsen MA. The Influence of Particle Size. Spray Technology and Marketing. 2004;24-27.

14. Rothe H. Special aspects of cosmetic spray evaluation. 2011.

15. Rothe H, Fautz R, Gerber E, Neumann L, Rettinger K, Schuh W, and Gronewold C. Special aspects of cosmetic

spray safety evaluations: Principles on inhalation risk assessment. Toxicol Lett. 8-28-2011;205(2):97-104.

16. Bremmer HJ, Prud'homme de Lodder LCH, and van Engelen JGM. Cosmetics Fact Sheet: To assess the risks for the

consumer; Updated version for ConsExpo 4. 20200.

http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/320104001.pdf. Date Accessed 8-24-2011. Report No. RIVM

320104001/2006. pp. 1-77.

17. ToxLabs. 1998. Mouse micronucleus test with SAT 980836 (disodium laureth sulfosuccinate) by oral

administration. Study No.: Toxlabs/1998/7 100 MK.1101. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal

Care Products Council on 6-15-2011.

18. Cognis GmbH. 2007. TEXAPON SB 3 UNKONS (Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate): Safety assessment for human

health.

http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/320104001.pdf

20

19. Food and Drug Research Laboratories. 1989. Acute oral toxicity study of Stepan agent 138 1-91 (24%) active in

Sprague-Dawley rats. 89-013A. [70% of the 24% active was disodium laureth sulfosuccinate - 16.8%

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate tested]. Submission of unpublished data by the Personal Care Products

Council on 6-15-2011.

20. Sanyo Chemical Industries Ltd. 2008. Material safety data sheet Beaulight ESS (Disodium C 12-14 Pareth-2

Sulfosuccinate). 6 pages.

21. RBM. 1996. Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate: 4-week toxicity study in rats by oral route followed by 4 weeks of

recovery. RBM EXP No. 950743.

22. Food and Drug Research Laboratories. 1989. Primary eye irritation study of Stepan agent 1381-91 (10% active) in

New Zealand white rabbits. 89-013B. [70% if tge 10% active was disodium laureth sulfosuccinate - 7%

disodium laureth sulfosuccinate]. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 6-

15-2011.

23. Sanyo Chemical Industries Ltd. 2007. Material safety data sheet Beaulight ESS-1OP (Disodium C 12-14 Pareth-1

Sulfosuccinate). 6 pages.

24. IBR Forschungs GmbH. 1987. Prüfung auf sensibilisierende eigenschaften am meerschwienchen nach B.

Magnussun und A.M. Kligmant - Rewopol SB FA 30 (Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate). Project - Nr.:2-

5-820-87. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 11-28-2011.

25. Barany, E., Lindberg, M., and Loden, M. Biophysical characterization of skin damage and recovery after exposure

to different surfactants. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;40(2):98-103.

26. Santucci, B., Cannistraci, C., Lesnoni, I., Ferraro, C., Rocco, M. G., Dell'Anna, L., Giannarelli, D., and Cristaudo,

A. Cutaneous response to irritants. Contact Dermatitis.2003, Feb. 2003;48(2):69-73.

27. Stephens & Associates, Inc. 1996. Survival analysis of a 14-day cumulative test. Study No. C90-0 163. Test material

F (202 1-49G) is a 1% dilution of Stepan-Mild LSB (24% active, 70% of which is disodium laureth

sulfosuccinate). [70% of 24% active is 16.8% - 1% dilution = 0.168% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate

tested]. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 6-15-011.

28. Essex Testing Clinic, Inc. 1989. Clinical safety evaluation of Stepan-Mild LSB, 10% active, PPL 5 181-89, Ref

#1381-88. 89-009A. [70% of the 10% active was Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate - 7% Disodium Laureth

Sulfosuccinate tested]. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 6-15-2011.

29. Consumer Product Testing, Inc. Initial submission: Letter from Rhone-Poulenc Inc. to USEPA regarding dermal and

ocular irritation studies with cover letter dated 10/12/94. NTIS Report No. OTS0590065. 1994. pp.1-11.

30. Product Safety Labs. 1989. Comedogenicity assay (Stepan-Mild LSB tested undiluted). 89-009-B. [70% of the 24%

active was disodium laureth sulfosuccinate - 16.8% disodium laureth sulfosuccinate tested]. Unpublished

data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 6-15-2011.

31. Scientific Committee on Consumer Products. Opinion on polidocanol (laureth-9). 10-2-2007.

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_o_113.pdf. Date Accessed 5-13-2010.

32. Zschimmer & Schwarz GmbH & Co KG. 2010. Basic material for formulation of bath preparations, hair shampoos

and different types of cleaning agents SETACIN 103 SPEZIAL (Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate).

33. Lubrizol. 2010. Material safety datasheet Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate. 11 pages.

34. Stepan Company. 1989. Composition and specification: Stepan-Mild LSB (composition of the material used in

studies 89-009A and 89-009B). Submission of unpublished data by the Personal Care Products Council on

6-15-2011.

http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_o_113.pdf

21

35. Stepan Company. 1989. Sample transfer from Stepan-Mild LSB (compositon of the material used in studies 89-

013A and 89-013B). Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council on 6-15-2011.

on the safety assessment of alkyl peg sulfosuccinates as ... · sulfosuccinate 5monoesters contain...

Documents